Monday, December 20, 2010

"He doeth not anything save it be for the benefit of the world, for he loveth the world, even that he layeth down his own life that he may draw all men unto him. Wherefore, he commandeth none that they shall not partake of his salvation."

This gives me more of an inside look into Christ's purpose. Elder Clayton of the Quorum of the 70 told the mission to write "Our Purpose" on a pair of glasses, so that we see Our Purpose in everything we look at. Christ doesn't have to write anything on any glasses because His purpose is written on his heart, "for he loveth the world."

I know that when we make sacrifices in our life, we enjoy seeing other's benefit. For example, during Christmas time many people buy gifts and put together hampers for the poor and needy. I know I've spent many Christmases decorating and packing treats. And what joy it brings my heart when I get to see those families open their gifts and see the light in their eyes.

How do you think you'd feel if you went through the trouble of making a hamper for a family who really needed it, and discovered the package, unopened, in the garbage the next day. Sounds ridiculous! But that's how Christ feels, and 1 million times worse, when He offers His atonement to His needy children and they throw it back in His face. Therefore, He "commandeth none", or, He invites all, to open His gift of eternal life.

Monday, December 13, 2010

"And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him. And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased."

Imagine this scene in your mind. Christ is in the water being held by John the Baptist. A dove flies overhead. Then a voice booms from above. Would your first thought, as an observer, be "wow, Jesus must be a ventriloquist because He can throw His voice up there and puppet around that bird all while being held in the water!" I am sure not. This discussion is about the Godhead as opposed to The Trinity.

"The Godhead is a type of unity in the attributes, powers, and purposes of its members" (Articles of Faith pg. 10). Just as Jesus had said -- they are ONE. It is not a contradiction, it is a clarification of what most people in the world interpret that to mean.

The very first chapter of Holy Writ clarifies that Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ are separate. In Genesis 1:26, it reads "And God said, Let us make man in OUR image, after OUR likeness..." which tells us not only that we are created in the image of God (inversely that He looks like US...like a human being) but also that Jesus and God look like each other. The Holy Ghost does not have a body so that He may dwell in us.

In contrast, the Trinity is a confusing, impossible union of...things. The Athanasian Creed, which defines the Trinity for most Christian sects, reads "We worship one god in trinity, and trinity in unity, neither confounding the person, nor dividing the substance. For there is one person of the Father, and another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost. But the godhead of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost is all one; the glory equal, the majesty co eternal....The Father uncreate, the Son uncreate, the Holy Ghost uncreate. The Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible, the Holy Ghost incomprehensible. The Father eternal, the Son eternal, the Holy Ghost eternal. And yet there are not 3 eternals, but one eternal. As also there are not 3 incomprehensibles, nor 3 uncreated, but one uncreated, and one incomprehensible..." And it goes on. What does that even mean? The answer is nothing. It is the safest guess anyone could make about the personality and substance of the Godhead.

Orson Pratt, in a pamphlet called "Absurdities of Immaterialism" compares Atheists (Those who do not believe in God) to immaterialists (Christians who follow and believe in the above Creed):

Atheists: "There is no God"

Immaterialist: "God is not here nor there, any more than he exists now and then."

Atheist: "He exists nowhere"Immaterialist: "There is such a substance as god, but it is without parts"

Atheist: "There is no such substance as spirit"

Immaterialist: "A spirit, though he lives and acts, occupies no room, and fills no space."

In conclusion, Pratt says "One class believes in no god, the other believes that Nothing is god and worships it as such."

I wholeheartedly believe in the Godhead as 3 separate beings. Not only does it make total sense, but it allows me to come closer to Them as I understand their roles, responsibilities, and personalities. It is such a simple doctrine that is so misunderstood.

**If anyone has any questions or would like clarification, let me know! Also, if you have a part that you would like me to expound further on, post it here!**

Wednesday, December 8, 2010

"And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water..." which got me thinking about baptism by immersion. This small sentence has 2 proofs of this doctrine: if one is coming out "straightway" they had to have been in the water first to come out of it. And second is in the word "baptize" itself. In explaining, the book "Articles of Faith" by James E. Talmage, I learned that "Baptism" comes from the Greek "Bapto" and "Baptizo" which literally means "to dip or to immerse". I love this quote:

"The native Greeks must understand their own language better than foreigners, and they have always understood the word baptism to signify dipping; and therefore from their first embracing of Christianity to this day they have always baptized, and do yet baptize, by immersion." -- Robinson

What truth! It is so simple and so clear. Talmage again proclaims that "the scriptures are devoid of ambiguity regarding the acceptable mode of baptism; and they boldly declare their belief, that bodily immersion by a duly commissioned servant or representative of the Savior is the only true form." So, if it is so clear, where did everyone go wrong?

Skipping back a bit in "The Articles of Faith" we find a section on The History of Infant Baptism. Here it is explained that churches who practice this rite believe Christ was showing them to do this in Matthew 19:13-15 "...but Jesus said, Suffer the little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven. And he laid his hands on them..." This passage clearly indicated Christ blessing the children, and is a monumental stretch to assume, from this one instance, that Christ endorses infant baptism.

It is clear, from history, that other sects really use infant baptism to try and claim as many followers as possible, even if it is restricting a human's agency. They used to wait exactly 8 days after the baby was born to baptize them, to parallel the rite of circumcision, however in the 3rd century, a council of Bishops met together and "determined that to post-pone baptism until the 8th day after birth was hazardous and consequently not to be allowed." In the LDS church all baptisimal candidates must first be interviewd by their bishop and deemed worthy. Of course this also signifies that they are entering into this covenant by their own free will and choice and are able to make that decision on their own. This is possible since the minimum age one can be baptized in the LDS church is 8, so they are old enough to make that oh so important decision on their own.

I have a testimony of baptism by the proper authority because Christ showed the way by His example and He is the perfect Being sent to us by the Father to the just that -- a perfect example.